The future of Australian property prices

[farmerge]

700,000 migrants will keep the prices bouyant, clever really, it certainly doesn't look good for Aussie youth IMO, a lot of competition is on the horizon and coming from poorer countries their expectations will be a lot lower.
It definitely looks like the recession we aren't going to have, but a lifestyle change may be on the horizon.

Will this maybe shades of former treasuer/Prime Minister Paul Keating's J curve, or the recession we had to have back then.

 

[farmerge]

700,000 new intakes, where to house them. She who is never wrong reckons the cruise ships are the answer. Park them in the Inner Harbours in each State and bingo the housing problem is solved. Social mis-conduct might be an issue though.

 

[Warr87]

700,000 new intakes, where to house them. She who is never wrong reckons the cruise ships are the answer. Park them in the Inner Harbours in each State and bingo the housing problem is solved. Social mis-conduct might be an issue though.

Doesn't sound dystopian at all....

 

[sptrawler]

Well it sounds like the housing bubble is going to keep getting pumped up, a lot of chair shuffling but no changes, may be the call of the day.
Interesting they used a struggling baby boomer to lead the article, when they are usually blaming the baby boomers for all the problems, maybe a change in rhetoric could be the precursor to putting a new spin on the narrative.

Phasing out property tax breaks could save $74b but it also could create 'significant economic shock'

The Parliamentary Budget Office warns phasing out property tax breaks may "trigger a significant economic shock". That's why next week's budget is more focused on increasing the supply of housing rather than trying to make housing affordable by reducing house prices.

www.abc.net.au

The federal budget, due to be handed down next week, aims to alleviate some pressure.

Its signature items include greater tax concessions for property developers, which the government says will encourage them to build more affordable housing.

This, again, is at odds with the Greens, who want direct investments in community housing rather than incentives for developers.

The Greens also want the phasing out of tax breaks, such as negative gearing and the capital gains tax concession, for property investors who have more than one rental property.

Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) costings show that ending the tax breaks would raise $74 billion, while the Greens' proposal to double rent assistance and provide more affordable housing would cost more than $69 billion.

The PBO notes that, because the proposal would "greatly reduce the return on investment for landlords", it's likely that "many would be unlikely to invest without either a significant fall in prices or a significant increase in rents".

However, without tackling lucrative tax breaks and incentives — and just focusing on increasing housing supply — can the government fix the housing crisis?

 

[qldfrog]

I am lost with your last sentence
"without tackling lucrative tax breaks and incentives" ..well it is a given that if you remove these the housing crisis will worsen.
It is a supply issue..more and more restrictions on new buildings and more and more migrants do not help sorting an issue.

 

[sptrawler]

I am lost with your last sentence
"without tackling lucrative tax breaks and incentives" ..well it is a given that if you remove these the housing crisis will worsen.
It is a supply issue..more and more restriction on new buildings and more and more migrants do not help sorting an issue

That last sentence was from the article I posted, as it was behind a firewall, not my personal observation.
I think it is a rhetorical question.
Personally I don't think the Govt is going to do anything about house prices, Australians just have to get used to it, along with a lower standard of living.

It's also funny how all of a sudden now they are in Government "a phasing out of property tax concessions, would trigger a significant economic shock', yet it was a policy at the previous election, obviously something doesn't add up.
With property prices, I think it could do with a significant shock, to break the ponzi cycle.

 

[qldfrog]

That last sentence was from the article I posted, as it was behind a firewall, not my personal observation.
I think it is a rhetorical question.
Personally I don't think the Govt is going to do anything about house prices, Australians just have to get used to it, along with a lower standard of living.

It's also funny how all of a sudden now they are in Government "a phasing out of property tax concessions, would trigger a significant economic shock', yet it was a policy at the previous election, obviously something doesn't add up.
With property prices, I think it could do with a significant shock, to break the ponzi cycle.

but the question remains..where would you put the millions of new aussie residents in the coming years if the RE price is artificially forced down from where it was..
obviously not by more building
Would you buy or built an IP in these condition, and would these tenants crying poor jump and purchase these rare new bargain price assets and live 10 per room hot swapping beds?
The government has to decide:e either the investors do the mass rentals market or the gov via public housing, but in that case, they have to do it.
might be good as they have more power over councils
a slow down path the European way, you will owe nothing not be that happy but everyone will be equal: white black, gay, lesbians and the Aussies will share living conditions with the slums of lima, chicago or Paris Lagos Cairo islamabah(?) : one world WEF style

 

[sptrawler]

but the question remains..where would you put the millions of new aussie residents in the coming years if the RE price is artificially forced down from where it was..
obviously not by more building
Would you buy or built an IP in these condition, and would these tenants crying poor jump and purchase these rare new bargain price assets and live 10 per room hot swapping beds?
The government has to decide:e either the investors do the mass rentals market or the gov via public housing, but in that case, they have to do it.
might be good as they have more power over councils
a slow down path the European way, you will owe nothing not be that happy but everyone will be equal: white black, gay, lesbians and the Aussies will share living conditions with the slums of lima, chicago or Paris Lagos Cairo islamabah(?) : one world WEF style

I think that is the plan, next cab off the rank a republic, then third world ala Argentina, Brazil, Chile.
The only difference between Australia and them, is the size of the population and the form of Govt, the economy is very similar.
As was said by Kev, Australia needs a population of 35-50 million by 2050, well we are on the way and dividing the pie (GDP) by double the people can only lead to one outcome IMO.
Hopefully we are wrong, but I don't see any republics with an economy like ours, that enjoys the same living standard.
The only ones that do are Canada and New Zealand and they have a lot in common with us, one the same form of Govt and two a manageable size population for their economy.

2009:

Rudd welcomes 'big Australia'

Kevin Rudd says he believes in a "big Australia", but he concedes that population growth poses complex challenges.

www.abc.net.au

2021:

Big Australia vital to protect the home front: Rudd

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd says Australia faces five “mega-challenges” in the future that need to be tackled or else end up a second-rate country.

www.afr.com

 

[Jeda]

I think that is the plan, next cab off the rank a republic, then third world ala Argentina, Brazil, Chile.
The only difference between Australia and them, is the size of the population and the form of Govt, the economy is very similar.
As was said by Kev, Australia needs a population of 35-50 million by 2050, well we are on the way and dividing the pie (GDP) by double the people can only lead to one outcome IMO.
Hopefully we are wrong, but I don't see any republics with an economy like ours, that enjoys the same living standard.
The only ones that do are Canada and New Zealand and they have a lot in common with us, one the same form of Govt and two a manageable size population for their economy.

2009:

Rudd welcomes 'big Australia'

Kevin Rudd says he believes in a "big Australia", but he concedes that population growth poses complex challenges.

www.abc.net.au

2021:

Big Australia vital to protect the home front: Rudd

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd says Australia faces five “mega-challenges” in the future that need to be tackled or else end up a second-rate country.

www.afr.com

far out you type of people never give up aust is doomed all polies are useles no one works we're turnng into a argentina a brazil chile bla bla bla

 

[sptrawler]

far out you type of people never give up aust is doomed all polies are useles no one works we're turnng into a argentina a brazil chile bla bla bla

Ok other than mineral exports, and a decreasing agricultural sector, what other form of income do we earn as a country?

Yep nothing to see here, all's good, bla bla ,bla.

Good to see you types are right on top of the issues, anyone need a barista. ?

 

[Jeda]

2010 not bad, let me know when you catch up

 

[sptrawler]

2010 not bad, let me know when you catch up

Why you think the trend has changed. ?

Maybe you can point out the recent boom in our manufacturing, agriculture and tertiary industries.

When I get a few moments I will find you more recent info, obviously you aren't aware of the issues.
There you go two minutes.



And just to clarify manufacturing hasn't gone anywhere in the last 10 years.

 

[Jeda]

Why you think the trend has changed. ?
When I get a few moments I will find you more recent info, obviously you aren't aware of the issues.

yep because Australian wealth has didminshed over the past 30 years, as can be seen by comentators like you

 

[sptrawler]

yep because Australian wealth has didminshed over the past 30 years, as can be seen by comentators like you

Obviously you have trouble reading charts.
Australia's wealth has increased with the advent of Japan industrialising first in the 1960's and then followed by China, which continued to drive the resources boom, which brings us back to my first post.
So finally you may be actually grasping the issue, we don't make resources, we only dig them up and sell them.
It really isn't a great long term plan if you want to fund your living standard in a sustainable manner, eventually you run out of sht to dig up.
By the way Chile, Argentina and Brazil all dig up the same sht we do.
You obviously have trouble grasping that, just keep chewing on the cigar, life's good. ?

 

[Jeda]

Obviously you have trouble reading charts.
Australia's wealth has increased with the advent of Japan industrialising first in the 1960's and then followed by China, which continued to drive the resources boom, which brings us back to my first post.
So finally you may be actually grasping the issue, we don't make resources, we only dig them up and sell them.
It really isn't a great long term plan if you want to fund your living standard in a sustainable manner, eventually you run out of sht to dig up.
By the way Chile, Argentina and Brazil all dig up the same sht we do.
You obviously have trouble grasping that, just keep chewing on the cigar, life's good. ?

you have all the answers to why Australia is not heading towards the dilema of 1970s argentina et al but you cant get past your own preconsieved dramas. grow a pair and move to the country that has what you want

 

[Jeda]

and take your mate the qldfrog, another old whiner and diner

 

[sptrawler]

you have all the answers to why Australia is not heading towards the dilema of 1970s argentina et al but you cant get past your own preconsieved dramas. grow a pair and move to the country that has what you want

and take your mate the qldfrog, another old whiner and diner

Well you obviously have nothing intelligent to add, so maybe an investment forum isn't your bag, there must be somewhere else you can troll.

 

[Joe Blow]

and take your mate the qldfrog, another old whiner and diner

Dear @Jeda, is this kind of post really called for? It doesn't add anything the discussion and some might suggest it is trolling. Please be a little more civil when debating with others. Thank you in advance.

 

[Jeda]

Dear @Jeda, is this kind of post really called for? It doesn't add anything the discussion and some might suggest it is trolling. Please be a little more civil when debating with others. Thank you in advance.

Hi joe, just one of those days that all the negativity gets to you. I need to stop reading posts from negative nelly's bangin on

 

[sptrawler]

Hi joe, just one of those days that all the negativity gets to you. I need to stop reading posts from negative nelly's bangin on

Actually it is people talking about the issues, both positive and negative that drive change, as can be seen on multiple fronts e.g climate change and shareholder activism, gay rights, distasteful and poorly directed Govt policy.

So in your opinion I shouldn't be negative about the issues that I've raised, that's an interesting perspective, so we as investors shouldn't be demanding a change of direction and more value adding industries be developed, we should just shut up and accept our fate?

Obviously we have different underlying beliefs, so be it, put me on ignore.

P.S I'm not always negative and I don't think all pollies are useless, if you look in the Western Australia thread earlier today I was actually singing the praises for Mark McGowan, so it isn't as though I don't give credit where I think credit is due.
It's just I want to see my grandkids, have as good a future as I had and I don't believe the current trajectory is going to produce that.